FINAL
24 June 2015
ECA REGIONAL UNDG TEAM MEETING
7-8 May, 2015 – ITU, Geneva
NOTE FOR RECORD
Opening Remarks
The meeting was opened by the Chair of the Regional UNDG Team for Europe and Central Asia. The agenda
of the meeting was approved, with one change. Due to the visit of the UN Secretary-General to Ukraine
coinciding with the date of the meeting, the session with the UNCT on “UN strategic programming in
Ukraine: Focus on RPA” was postponed. However, it was decided that an update would still be provided
by some Regional Directors, who recently visited the country.
Both agenda of the meeting and list of participants are included at the end of this note as Annex 1 and
Annex 2 respectively.
Update on UNDAF Roll-out in the Region
A presentation was made by the PSG Co-Chairs on the UNDAF roll-out status and key lessons learnt. The
full presentation is available at https://undg.org/home/regional-teams/europe-cis/.
In addition, the R-UNDG Chair noted the following:
 2015 UNDAF roll-out countries are Albania and Montenegro. Processes have started in those
countries, and the aim is to finalize those within 6-8 months. It was noted that in 2014 UNDAF
roll-out countries the length of the process was too big, which needs to change in this year’s
processes.
 In terms of strategic intent of new UNDAFs, the number of outcomes should not be more than 6
outcomes in those countries.
 DOCO supported Innovation Facility approved Albania and Montenegro as countries to receive
funding for innovations within their UNDAF processes. In addition, BiH, Moldova and Kosovo
(UNSCR 1244) were also approved for additional funding.
 Within middle-income countries, most of the governments do not see the UN providing
“assistance” any longer. There was an important shift from “assistance” to “partnerships”, with
focus on “development” maintained.
 The R-UNDG should monitor the implementation of UNDAFs through RCARs, focusing on target
implementation rate and financial delivery, as well as on leveraging of national resources for
UNDAF results.
 In terms of Delivering as One approach, there are not many countries in our region, which formally
started the implementation of DaO. At the same time, all countries started the application of key
DaO elements through their UNDAFs.
Fully agreeing with the Chair, the R-UNDG members made the following key comments:
 The key function of the Peer Support Group is the support to the R-UNDG oversight function. In
this sense, PSG comments to countries on their draft UNDAFs are becoming mandatory, at least
to be reviewed.
1|Page
FINAL







24 June 2015
In terms of guidance to countries on UNDAF roll-out process, it was noted that the UNDG would
be looking into how Post-2015 would influence the UNDAF global guidance. It was also
emphasized that it would be critical to have feedback from the regional and country level at
discussion stage. There is a need for systematic inclusion of R-UNDG Chair in such global guidance
development processes in order to avoid disconnect between regional/country and global levels.
With reference to integration of SDGs in UNDAFs, it was noted that it is yet premature to look at
integration of SDG indicators since these are not yet identified/approved. However, SDG pillars
are already included in UNDAFs, as the latter are issue-based. In addition, it was pointed out that
countries should receive guidance on SDG implementation, which is directly linked to UNDAFs,
sooner rather than later. Nevertheless, it must be noted that countries received a lot of guidance
in terms of SDGs integration in UNDAFs. In addition, two rounds of national consultations took
place; some countries are involved in piloting of SDGs; set of regional SDG priorities was produced
in the form of a common advocacy kit. Against all of this information and guidance, there is now
a need for more leadership from RCs/UNCTs.
In terms of accountabilities, it was noted that leadership in UNDAF roll-out processes will be an
important aspect in the forthcoming performance appraisal of RCs. There is also a need for more
detailed feedback on leadership of Heads of Agencies.
Regarding reduction in number of outcomes in new UNDAFs, the R-UNDG should make sure that
this is not a simple process of amalgamation, but rather further prioritization. At the country level,
UNCTs should not focus on outcomes or outputs, but rather substantive issues. In this regard, new
UNDAFs are becoming more common priorities, rather than agencies’ mandates.
In light of the move from “assistance” to “partnership” in UNDAFs, there should be an analysis
undertaken of whether UNDAFs are really true partnership frameworks and not just in their
names. At the moment, the documents are not yet at the level of true partnerships. However, it
was noted that such transformation may take time, and we can achieve the objective as long as
we are consistent in messaging and direction.
The way the Delivering as One approach was described or experienced may have added to fear of
straight jacket. However, SOPs are flexible and should be contextualized, and the R-UNDG and
countries should focus on strategic intent and defuse the perception of straight jacket. Delivering
as One is not something new, as are all countries are delivering as one on a variety of things.
The need of streamlining UNDAF reporting (e.g. using the same format/ template for all UNDAF
reports, including annual reporting etc.) was raised. UN DOCO will be supporting this at the global
inter-agency level, when UNDAF guidelines will be revised.
Agreed Follow-Up:
 The Lessons Learnt note, prepared by the PSG and once finalized, will be shared with R-UNDG
members, other regions and DOCO.
 The PSG should be requested to provide more detailed feedback on leadership of RCs, as well as
Heads of Agencies in UNDAF roll-out processes.
 An analysis of UNDAF outcomes will be undertaken to map linkages with Post-2015 agenda.
 Before the agreed R-UNDG retreat on Post-2015, an online survey should be undertaken with RCs
and Heads of Agencies in order to get their views on (i) how they see the process of SDG integration,
including in UNDAFs; (ii) what are their expectations from the global and regional levels; (iii) where
do they see R-UNDG contribution to their country level work on SDGs; (iv) how SDGs are helpful in
their EU aspirations.
2|Page
FINAL
24 June 2015
Updates on Recent Visits to Ukraine
Several agencies’ representatives had recent visits to Ukraine. Executive Secretary of UNECE, UNHCR
Regional Director, and UNDP Senior Advisor provided updates on their visits. The following are the key
points noted by the speakers:

UNECE: The International Conference for Ukraine was attended by the UNECE Executive Secretary
on behalf of the UN Secretary-General. It was mentioned that the way the event was prepared
impacted the overall result of the conference. Participation level dropped and it turned more into
a political event rather than a donor conference. The UN RC was very active in seeking ways to
promote/build donor coordination. As a result, we managed to position the UN to support and
strengthen donor coordination in the country, which has a lot of opportunities, but is also an
extremely complex environment.
The Recovery and Peacebuilding Assessment (RPA) was presented at the Conferences. It assesses
$1.6 billion for recovery and other broad range of activities and should be considered the frame
for the UN engagement.
UNECE specifically engages on supporting the development of trade agreements as one of
country’s priorities. There is hope that in collaboration with ITC and UNCTAD, the UNECE we can
help in reaching and implementing such an agreement in Ukraine.

UNHCR: The scope of displacement is now 1.2 million of internally displaced people; there are
delays with the establishment of government one stop-shop, as well as passing legislation. In
terms of predictability, two scenarios are considered: (1) presumption of conflict (not necessarily
full-fledged) and more displacement; ceasefire is not proceeding in the way it should be; there is
more restriction of freedom of movement; or (2) stabilization, which leads to protraction of the
situation in non-government control area.
With reference to RPA, it covers only one part of Ukraine. Since it should respect the territorial
integrity of the country, it can’t be considered as the only platform for the whole UN support.
UNCT needs to discuss contingency planning. It was also felt that agencies need better debriefing
from the UN RC. Further discussions are needed within the UNCT, especially focusing on (i)
improving the understanding of Ukrainian authorities on the UN representation/presence in
Donbass; (ii) discussions on Minsk process and how the UN can be engaged in tripartite dialogue
and 4 working groups; (iii) link with OCHA, which is leading on donor coordination group.

UNDP: The RPA is a humanitarian and early recovery response plan, which is a good framework
for the UN work to move forward. Theoretically, it can be broken down into three categories:
buildings – a lot of the assessment was done before the February fighting in Debaltsevo;
bureaucracies – Donbass Recovery Agency has limited capacity and few people, the UN can with
strengthening capacities; and people – IDPs are entitled for certain rights under Ukrainian law.
Whereas the fighting can cause unpredictable changes in the nature and extent of the damages
to buildings, the need for capacity development of the relevant bureaucracies, and for support to
vulnerable people, remain. Overall, Ukraine is getting deeper and deeper into economic crisis,
with raising food prices, inflation, 1 million jobs disappeared, and all of this does not include
Crimea.
3|Page
FINAL
24 June 2015
The updates were followed by the comments from the R-UNDG members, with the following key points
made:
 There should be no deep discussion involving UN actors without the UN RC/HC present in
discussions.
 On the ground, there are very good links between the UN RC and UNCT and the rest of
international organizations (OSCE, EU). The work we do at country level will be critical in our
relationship with the EU in the region – if the UN agencies are not able to support the country
with policies and reforms, this will impact the UN partnerships with the EU.
 The RPA contains extremely valuable components applicable to the whole of Ukraine. In the
country, there is a big capacity issue – delays in reform agenda are not about the political will, but
rather the limited available capacity, which is challenging. In terms of Human Rights and their
monitoring, which is continuing including Crimea through NGOs, the issue is now moving into
building capacities for implementation of applicable conventions. $1.2 billion of the total $1.6
billion is planned to be for infrastructure, but even this may not be realistic because of capacity
lack.
 Based on their recent visit to Ukraine (including to the East), UNICEF shared that the crisis is an
entry point to accelerate the reform process and systems building work in areas that were so far
closed (e.g. vaccine procurement).
 UNCT could be more outspoken about a possible escalation of the conflict and the related
contingency planning required. UN advocacy for facilitating humanitarian access and
simplification of procedures for humanitarian assistance should be stepped up.
 IDPs, 70% of whom are women and children, are benefiting from support by UNDP and UNICEF.
These people do not only need jobs, but also access to basic services.
 For the Government, number one is the reform issue, number two is the capacity issue, and
number three is the issue of peacekeeping. The Government is under huge pressure, as the
international organizations are requesting reforms, and at the same time there are insufficient
resources for these.
 The UN needs to renew the urgency to start tackling reform issues caused by humanitarian
challenges. The UN needs presence at the sub-national levels: although the UN RC made a lot of
efforts on this, the issue needs to be escalated.
 UNICEF and WHO are very concerned about introduction of polio in Ukraine, which may spread
in the region. In Ukraine, the routine immunization is at 50% coverage and is not handled in NGCAs
areas and the stock of vaccine is low. In addition, population movement is increasing the risk.
Agreed Follow-Up:
 The R-UNDG will engage with Director of DPA Europe Division for political briefing.
Social Protection Floor Initiative in the Region
A short presentation prepared by ILO, UNICEF and UNDP was made by the ILO Regional Director for
Europe and Central Asia. The presentation is available at https://undg.org/home/regional-teams/europe-
cis/.
In addition, the UNICEF Regional Director highlighted that social protection is understood as a protection
system to disadvantaged people. From this perspective, all interested UN agencies can engage in the
proposed Thematic Working Group on Social Protection and contribute with expertise.
4|Page
FINAL
24 June 2015
The following comments were made in subsequent discussions:





UNDP is also very engaged in this initiative and the whole area of social protection. This is the core
area of the most of UNDAFs, and there is a lot of need for UNCTs to understand what entry points
exist in programming; UNDP’s entry is around social inclusion and inequalities. For UNCTs, it is
important to provide an integrated support package from R-UNDG, and guidance on clear division
of labor at country level.
The SPF initiative it is extremely valid within MICs context, where inequalities are growing.
Kyrgyzstan and Albania could be the countries, where the initiative could be piloted.
With regard to the composition of the group, social protection experts at country and regional
level will be part of the Thematic Working Group. At the same time, even if an agency is not
formally a member of the Group, if there is a need for a particular expertise by a specific entity, it
can be called in to provide that specific support – there should be a core group with other agencies
contributing as needed.
The Group will focus on common positioning and messaging, joint resource mobilization – all of
these will contribute to delivering as one in social protection area.
Similar initiatives are taking place in other regions, for example, in Asia R-UNDG.
Agreed Follow-Up:
 The Thematic Working Group on Social Protection will be established and will work under the
overall chapeau of the Programme Advisory Group.
 The respective draft TORs should be modified to reflect comments made during the meeting and
shared with the R-UNDG Team through its Secretariat.
 The R-UNDG will explore the interest of Kyrgyzstan and Albania UNCTs to pilot the SPF initiative,
with the latter being a very good case to pilot as the country is just starting its UNDAF roll-out.
However, the implementation of the initiative should not be restricted only to these two countries
– once established, the Group should inform UNCTs on the initiative and purposeful seek their
expression of interest in taking it forward.
Development Implications of ‘Ruble Crisis’
The UNDP Senior Advisor made a presentation on the situation in the region, as impacted by changes in
Russian ruble, as well as other implications on countries in the region due to the change in geopolitical
situation. The full presentation is available at https://undg.org/home/regional-teams/europe-cis/.
The R-UNDG members made the following key comments:
 Analyses like presented by UNDP are extremely useful for all UN agencies and should be shared
with the R-UNDG members on a regular basis. Especially useful these will be if further analysis of
linkages and impact is made in terms of (i) migration issues as the decrease in remittance, while
directly linked to the situation in the Russian Federation, is also linked to the situation in Ukraine
with increased out-migration; (ii) in terms of what are the budget allocations and what are the
financial constraints in terms of human development; (iii) with regard to labor market, it would
even be stronger if the emphasis is made on the quality of labor, linked to efficiency of economy.
 All of these can help in clearly position of the UN not only in terms of tracking several important
aspects in the region, but also provide ground for discussions over what economic model is most
5|Page
FINAL

24 June 2015
applicable for the production of outcomes in human development, decrease in social exclusion
and inequalities. These will also help the UN at the regional level to come up with common
messaging and advocacy on key development challenges not only with governments, but also
other international partners, e.g. EU, WB, etc., hence gaining strength in negotiations with these
partners.
‘Ruble crisis’ also impacted UNCTs and especially local staff in terms of their remuneration. There
is growing discontent in countries since some countries receive salaries in US dollars, others don’t.
Some agencies did not find a solution to top up their salaries decreased due to depreciation of
local currency. This leads to staff moving out of the organization. A lot of issues are also coming
to UNDP, which directly engages with its OHR and the ICSC and its secretariat. However, a priori
there is not a very positive outlook when it comes to increases in salaries and it is very hard to get
exceptions. Even when the exception is made, the process takes about 6 months lap.
Agreed Follow-Up:
 Each R-UNDG meeting will start with this type of analyses (economic, political, social,
humanitarian, environmental, human rights). The next meeting will start with political context
analysis. For this, Elizabeth Spehar from DPA, will be invited.
 Through Programme Advisory Group, a small group should be established to work on common
qualitative measurement of the key substantive issues (like poverty, social protection, etc.). These
should be linked to Post-2015 agenda and respective monitoring. Such monitoring should go
beyond averages, make interlinkages between various areas showing their inter-dependability, and
used for common advocacy on key issues to have much stronger voice as a region. Such an initiative
will also show the way to other regions. In addition to vulnerability analysis for Kyrgyzstan, same
can be done for other countries, like Georgia, Moldova, etc.
 Information on which country-level salaries are paid in US dollars and which are not, as well as the
rationale for such differences, will be sought from the relevant HQ unit.
Human Rights in Europe and Central Asia
The session was joined by RCs and UNCTs from Tajikistan (UN RC, FAO, UNDP, UN Women, OHCHR) and
Uzbekistan (UN RC, UNDP, UNFPA). Presentations by both UN RCs are available at
https://undg.org/home/regional-teams/europe-cis/.
In addition, the OHCHR Regional Director highlighted the following key points:
 OHCHR is clustering and prioritizing the actions that Member States have to implement. This task
is not to define the actions of any of the agency at country level, but rather prioritizing hundreds
of recommendations that Member States receive.
 Universal Periodic Review (UPR) is a very good tool that can be used even in countries where
Human Rights is a sensitive issue.
 In terms of the role the ECA R-UNDG can play, this should focus on promoting lessons learnt in
some countries – like Uzbekistan and Tajikistan – for application and replication in others. We
need to make sure that countries have access to good practices. These should also feed into
policies and guidelines developed at the global level. In addition, available instruments should be
more internalized by individual agencies considering that Human Rights issues are the mandate
for all and only OHCHR.
In subsequent discussions, agencies made the following key points:
6|Page
FINAL




24 June 2015
Human Rights issues are included in all new UNDAFs, which was not the case before.
It will be beneficial for the region if OHCHR could consider a regional presence in Istanbul in order
to provide closer advisory services to countries. OHCHR is currently in the process of
strengthening its regional presence and support to countries. However, the reality is that there
are more demands for Human Rights Advisors than OHCHR can support.
In terms of OHCHR prioritizing UPR recommendations, it was noted that implementation of
Human Rights agenda at country level is a joint responsibility. When clustering and prioritization
is done, it helps avoid duplication – out of thousands of recommendations, OHCHR tries to cluster
those based on key priority areas for implementation.
With regard to joint missions to countries, as the one held in Tajikistan, the R-UNDG Team should
be engaged in preparations of such missions in the future.
Agreed Follow-Up:
 RCs/UNCTs should continuously advocate for Human Rights (through a public voice or soft power,
balancing human rights monitoring and constructive engagement), and engage with agencies for
specific mandates.
 With regard to future joint missions, agencies will be contacted for engagement from the very
beginning.
 The R-UNDG should engage more in collecting and sharing lessons learnt and good practices at
country level. These should be shared through a dedicated page within R-UNDG website.
Possibilities will be explored on the latter.
 OHCHR should look into the possibility of becoming a depository for sharing such experiences.
 OHCHR will also look into the possibility to establish Human Rights capacity at the regional level for
dedicated country support.
Unpacking Inequalities in the Region
A presentation was made by UNDP Senior Advisor and can be found at https://undg.org/home/regionalteams/europe-cis/.
The following key points were raised during R-UNDG discussion:
 The debate proposed by the presentation is more in terms of how the R-UNDG can approach the
issue of inequalities through programmatic approaches and how inequality lens are ensure in all
programmatic interventions.
 At the regional level, there is a number of key aspects of inequalities, like gender, minority, subregional etc., which are already agreed among agencies and are regularly monitored.
 What is now needed is to show the social multiple dimensions of inequality. In addition, there
should be a strong correlation with Human Rights – the link between economic, social and rights
perspective needs to be strongly substantiated and made as the basis for common advocacy on
inequality issues.
Agreed Follow-Up:
 UNICEF will share its 5 multi-country assessments on inequities. Other agencies should also share
their current assessments and work on inequalities.
 Under the auspices of the Programme Advisory Group, agencies will identify key areas of common
interest, like gender, youth, maternal health etc., and start working on data issues. Respective
analysis should be undertaken and common advocacy promoted in the agreed areas.
7|Page
FINAL
24 June 2015
Any Other Business
R-UNDG Members provided the following information:
 The R-UNDG Team should discuss the Syria situation, especially in relation to Turkey and broader
humanitarian environment (3RPs). In this discussion, both ECA and Arab R-UNDG Teams should
be engaged.
 Turkey’s Presidency over G20, also in its reference to BRICS, merits discussion within the group,
especially in relation to the UN’s engagement in the process and common messaging. In this
regard, it was noted that the UN RC in Turkey is very much engaged in this issue and worked on
the paper on inclusive business. In addition, China is interested in taking over the thread of
inclusive business, which will be linked to Post-2015, when they take over the G-20 Presidency
next year.
 Another issue that the R-UNDG should look into is the common approach to working with
International Financial Institutions (IFIs).
 A labor ministerial meeting will be organized in February 2016 by the Russian Federation in its
presidency function of BRICS.
 A global conference on Violence Against Women will happen in Istanbul in October-November
2015 and will be hosted by Turkish Government and UN-Women (and maybe UNFPA).
 With regard to the Astana International Water Conference, it will be a forum with high level
agency representation. The R-UNDG members should have an opportunity to contribute to
messaging to ensure consistency.
Agreed Follow-Up:
 With reference to Syria crisis, the UN RC will be requested to update the R-UNDG Team on his
involvement on the issue during the next meeting. R-UNDG Chairs from Asia and Arab regions will
be invited into this discussion.
 In addition, a video session with the R-UNDG Chairs of Asia and Arab regions will be organized to
discuss how to improve inter-regional collaboration.
 In terms of Dushanbe International Water Conference, the respective RC Office will be requested to
share the outcomes of the conference.
 Members were requested to make contributions to draft agendas, which are circulated prior to RUNDG meetings.
 Links to background documents will be included in agendas of the meetings.
Closing Remarks
The meeting was seen as very interesting and strategic, as the focus during the two days was on very
substantive and highly strategic issues.
The R-UNDG members should improve sharing of their analytical work – if there are any think pieces
available at the moment, agencies were encouraged to share those.
A Thematic Working Group on Social Protection Floor and a Gender Theme Group were established to
work under the auspices of the Programme Advisory Group.
Although to be confirmed, we hope that OHCHR can become a depository of good practices in the area of
Human Rights.
With regard to SDGs, a one-day retreat will be organized back-to-back to our next meeting. Eventually,
the R-UNDG should also develop a guidance note for country support.
8|Page
FINAL
24 June 2015
Information on salary situation in countries of the region will be sought from the relevant HQ unit.
The UN RC designated for Montenegro – Fiona McCluney – received her accreditation and will start work
at the beginning of June. In the absence of a formal UN RC, the UNICEF Representative performed the
functions of an RC during 6 months. A formal appreciation letter will be sent to him.
The RC induction training will be held on 6-10 July.
It is proposed that the next ECA R-UNDG meeting together with a one-day retreat on Post-2015 will be
held around SPECA meeting in November, in Dushanbe. Agencies should inform if they have constraints
on those dates.
9|Page
FINAL
24 June 2015
ANNEX 1
ECA REGIONAL UNDG TEAM MEETING
Agenda
TIME
AGENDA ITEMS
BACKGROUND
7 MAY 2015
15:30-15:45
OPENING REMARKS
Ms. Cihan Sultanoglu, Chair, ECA Regional UNDG Team
15:45-17:00
UPDATE ON UNDAF ROLL-OUT IN THE REGION
Mr. Olivier Adam, UNDP Deputy Regional Director/ PSG Co-Chair
Mr. Heimo Laakkonen, UNFPA Regional Director/ PSG Co-Chair
(Session I)
17:00-18:00
ITU MUSEUM TOUR
Mr. Jaroslaw Ponder, Strategy and Policy Advisor, ITU
8 MAY 2015
8:30-8:45
Welcome Coffee
8:45-9:00
WELCOMING REMARKS
Ms. Cihan Sultanoglu, Chair, ECA Regional UNDG Team
9:00-10:30
UN STRATEGIC PROGRAMMING IN UKRAINE: FOCUS ON RPA
Updates from R-UNDG Members
(Session II)
11:00-12:00
(Session III)
DEVELOPMENT IMPLICATIONS OF “RUBLE CRISIS”
Mr. Ben Slay, UNDP Senior Advisor, Istanbul Regional Hub (in person)
12:00-13:00
Lunch
13:00-15:00
HUMAN RIGHTS IN EUROPE AND CENTRAL ASIA
Mr. Gianni Magazzeni, OHCHR Chief of the Americas and Europe and Central Asia Branch (skype/
video Brussels)
Mr. Alexander Zuev, Tajikistan UN Resident Coordinator, and UNCT Members (in person)
Mr. Stefan Priesner, Uzbekistan UN Resident Coordinator, and UNCT Members (skype Tashkent)
(Session IV)
Development implications
of the “ruble crisis”
(UNDP note)
15:00-15:15
Coffee Break
15:15-16:15
UNPACKING INEQUALITIES IN THE REGION
Mr. Ben Slay, UNDP Senior Advisor, Istanbul Regional Hub (in person)
RHDR on Inequalities
(UNDP note)
Dialogue on Inequalities
(UNDP meeting report)
SOCIAL PROTECTION FLOOR INITIATIVE IN THE REGION
Ms. Marie-Pierre Poirier, UNICEF Regional Director, CEE/CIS
Ms. Rie Vejs-Kjeldgaard, ILO Deputy Regional Director for Europe and Central Asia
Social Protection Floor
Initiative (background)
Joint UNDG-ILO Letter to
RCs on SPF Initiative
(Session V)
16:15-17:00
(Session VI)
17:00-17:30
AGREEMENT ON NEXT STEPS & CLOSING REMARKS
Ms. Cihan Sultanoglu, Chair, ECA Regional UNDG Team
10 | P a g e
FINAL
24 June 2015
ANNEX 2
ECA REGIONAL UNDG TEAM MEETING
Participants
NR
AGENCY
1
Chair, ECA Regional UNDG Team
2
Chair, Regional Coordination
Mechanism
3
4
UNICEF
5
6
UN-Women
7
UNDP
8
9
UN Resident Coordinator,
Tajikistan, and UNCT members
10 UN Resident Coordinator,
Uzbekistan, and UNCT members
11
UNFPA
12
13 UNEP
14 WHO
15
16 ILO
17
18 UNHCR
19
UNECE
20
21 UNOPS
22 FAO
23 ITU
24 UNOHCHR
25 ITU
26 UNDOCO
27 ECA R-UNDG Secretariat
NAME
Cihan Sultanoglu
Christian Friis Bach
E-MAIL
cihan.sultanoglu@undp.org
cfb@unece.org
Marie-Pierre Poirier
Elena Gaia
Mele Bostoen
Ingibjorg Gisladottir
Olivier Adam
Ben Slay
Alexander Zuev
mppoirier@unicef.org
egaia@unicef.org
mbostoen@unicef.org
ingibjorg.gisladottir@unwomen.org
olivier.adam@undp.org
ben.slay@undp.org
alexander.zuev@undp.org
Stefan Priesner (by video)
stefan.priesner@undp.org
Heimo Laakkonen
Marta Diavolova
Jan Dusik
Nedret Emiroglu
Heinz Koller
Rie Vejs Kjeldgaard
Daniel Smith
Vincent Cochetel
Monika Linn
Michael Kunz
Bruce McCarron
Sandra Aviles
Jaroslaw Ponder
Gianni Magazzeni
Jaroslaw Ponder
Dena Assaf
Liudmila Barcari
laakkonen@unfpa.org
diavolova@unfpa.org
jan.dusik@unep.org
nem@euro.who.int
koller@ilo.org
vejs@ilo.org
smithd@ilo.org
cochetel@unhcr.org
monika.linn@unece.org
michael.kunz@unece.org
moink@unops.org
sandra.aviles@fao.org
jaroslaw.ponder@itu.int
gmagazzeni@ohchr.org
jaroslaw.ponder@itu.int
dena.assaf@undg.org
liudmila.barcari@undp.org
11 | P a g e